| brian carroll on Sat, 20 May 2006 12:32:56 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> preface to Part 3 (on policy) |
[several world-scale changes since writing Part 2, thus necessary to
further understand the situation before continuing. a post on logic
will follow which will be to consider the present situation as
existing in two different worldviews/paradigms/realities/etc...]
---
to continue with strategic planning for .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS it
is important to once again clarify its reason and purpose. in the
present situation in which there is an endless 'War of Terror' which
has become a business-model for certain interests whom happen to
profit from such a mode of global warfaring, the problems being
'fought' are not even being addressed and instead are being
exacerbated so as to continue with the extension of this warfaring.
to resolve issues of the 'War of Terror' would require a fair and
just resolution of the mideast conflict between Israel and Palestine,
for instance, in addition to another approach to diplomacy. none of
this has been possible within 'War of Terror' modeling, because it is
biased for making war, and doing so in a biased way that looks at
only one-side of the situation. this 'governance' is happening
outside of the 'public' checks-and-balances of representative
government in the .US and instead the decision-making guiding the
collective state of some 300 million citizens is being led by special-
interests, which if taking account of these actions make .US citizens
* less safe * and promotes further TERRORISM against .US citizens and
interests, because of such contrarian policy. what has occurred,
instead, is that through INSURRECTIONISTS both internal and external
to the .US government, the policy of an ally has been out outsourced
to the .US and subsidized by .US taxpayers which does not benefit .US
citizens or the .US state, and has killed tens of thousands of
innocent citizens in its pursuit, and some 2,600 .US soldiers
fighting for a cause that exists outside of the domain of the .US
constitution yet this INSURRECTIONIST POLICY is equated as being a
natural extension of the constitution: that is, to put the .US
government and .US voluntary military in service to another country
to pursue its foreign policy objectives via fighting and dying on its
behalf and for its strategic interests. any .US leader who advocates
such strategic actions is doing so against the very interests of the
state and its peoples and is incompetent in protecting and defending
its public interests in a hostile and chaotic world. there is no law
which can justify treason as patriotism.
and yet, given a complex world, it may be possible that whatever
the .US interests are in such a foolish policy as it was undertaken,
that the good can still be salvaged from this misguided affair of
state, if there is a wholesale change in leadership and direction
from this point onward. that is, to rebuild what has been lost, and
to take command and control of this situation so as to turn it around
and secure the situation, begin .US troop withdrawals, while also
engaging and addressing issues of nuclear peace, mideast peace, and a
2-state solution between .PS and .IL by which to resolve the 'War of
Terror' and start the new millennium by building, not destroying it.
in other words: what will be worth all the bloodshed and treasure?
securing mideast peace. it will save the mission and put the
sacrifices in the proper context in which they belong-- the ultimate
goal is to secure a world at peace and allow it to work together for
mutual goals and shared prosperity- this is what is required to begin
on that path, which will both differentiate the 21st century from all
preceding centuries while connecting it with the greatest events of
the past, and define world civilization anew, at world-scale, and to
govern in this realm.
it is in this way that even though .US policy may have been wrong,
that given the way things work with machineries of state, it may also
have been 'necessary' in terms of how state automatically function in
pursuit of their goals, as behavioral mechanisms, and in this paradox
that there may still exist a human dimension whereby - it is true and
believed - that there is some saving grace from all of this, and that
should this current situation be turned around, that in the end, some
centuries later, it may have allowed changes to occur that otherwise
possibly would not have been able to, even if wrong and immoral. this
is to say that, given the givens, and how politics work, that
President Bush banked his presidency on this decision, as being the
right one, for its transcendent aspects of being able to resolve the
problems of mideast peace. at this point the only way that is going
to happen is by taking another strategy which actually can and does
resolve the ongoing and new problems, yet this requires the wholesale
jettisoning of Neoconservative and status-quo policies in the mideast
so as to secure a region-wide and worldwide resolution of these
issues-- thus to save this situation and to enable resolution of the
dimensions it has opened up, requires a total transformation of
approach which can and will secure a mideast peace and vindicate the
human dimension - of greater freedom, representation, respect, and
cultural development - in the mideast, yet in a way other than
planned by INSURRECTIONISTS who have become the biggest problem in
the existing scenario. therefore, the sooner they stand down, the
sooner the proper approach to moving forward with this situation will
be able to occur, and if they truly want to live to see their
ultimate goals accomplished, of mideast peace, they should support
those willing to work in the middle and the gray-areas who can see
this through to the next stage, and work together with others * on
the same-side *, the human side of this world coin, instead of
pursuing machined solutions that only dehumanize and work against
peaceful and just resolutions.
this is not about politics - this is about governance. local,
national, and world governance and in whose name and interest it is
pursued. if it is pursued in the shared 'human' interest, if it is
in .IQ or between .PS and .IL, it is different than if it is pursued
in the name of religion or nationalism or ideology or culture. as
humans everyone has a stake in seeing humanity triumph over the out-
of-control machineries of state which can automatically launch
nuclear weapons strikes or counterattacks by default of programming
in intensities as they exist today. thus, there is a moral obligation
to not forget the humanity involved, in stoking nuclear rhetoric, as
this situation can become dangerous to the point where it is a
competition only between machines. which is the entire problem with
the 'War of Terror' rhetoric: the dehumanization of the enemy as
'terrorists' has turned people, humans who are defending their homes
and their children and families in Iraq, into 'terrorists' -- which
is disingenuous and even strategically blasphemous as to accurately
depicting the situation as it exists, and not as it is ideologically
believed to be in a distorted model of reality as it is wished to be,
so as to justify the current approach which is unjust and immoral,
because it is based on lies, deceits, and deception in pursuit of
goals which are contrary to the ideas (.US Constitution) which are
placed in their service, to pursue, as if it is all based on divine
action. that is, torture, collective punishment, arbitrary
destruction, -- based on a stategy and ideas not only incoherent,
they are without truth.
the .US military needs to stop its pursuit of machine-based decision-
making whose programming has been hacked by the NEOCONS and start to
serve the human cause in its policies. this is the _only way to turn
this situation around: to realign with the fundamental and original
principles of the .US constitution, to uphold these principles, as
they will protect the .US military and its citizens and will allow
the horrendous relationships that now exist to be re-established once
changes take place with .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS. that is, the .US
military needs to regain respect and honor that has been lost to the
lies and abuses of being misled on this misguided and illegal
international action, and doing so will secure their return and also
place them in service to the overriding goals of the .US state which
is the human cause, which can be found in all situations now
underway, and whose basis for strategy will help secure the end of
this 'War of Terror' by resolving the core issues which underly all
of these ongoing conflicts-- thus, there is not only hope and reason
to believe this can be turned around-- there is the opportunity to
take where things exist today, with the .US military where it now
exists, and to strategically transform this situation through their
actions in largely non-combat policy missions, GOODWILL missions,
which will achieve the ultimate goals by which these actions were
undertaken: only a route different than the NEOCONS intended. and by
pursuing such a course, in cooperation and along with the help from
others both regionally and at world-scale, will be able to transform
and rebalance the basic geostrategic relationship from a world at war
to one that established a world at peace.
this is not an overstatement if considering the existing context is
of endless war, generated by the mideast conflict at world-scale,
while to resolve this in a mideast peace settlement with regional
development via infrastructural projects would be to transform the
existing destruction into one of peaceful building, which nullifies
the need for an endless 'War of Terror' through its achievements.
needless to say, everyone can find a place in working toward this
shared goal, no matter where on the spectrum they may exist, if
warriors or neoconservatives even. that is, to refrain from working
against such a peaceful and innovative resolution of the existing
situation, to give it a chance to succeed, and allow those willing to
take the necessary risks to take them, and to support them in the
ways possible, so as to improve the odds that doing the impossible
may not only be necessary, it becomes the only way through this. and
there will be war and death and terror until this basic fact is
realized, that only human beings can resolve this situation in a way
that works for everyone, where all gain 2/3rds of what they need,
while not getting everything (3/3) - this requires compromising or
letting go of 1/3rd of ideological views where one gets all they can
demand, which allows a grey-area to exist, to enable coexistence.
this is to say, 'work with us' as human beings, else in working
against humanity one is to place themselves in league with machines
and their automated and dehumanized development which is, it has been
proposed, the underlying reason for these conflicts, and which can
and will be addressed in terms of modes of governance, by
reconfiguring these (constitutional) relationships between citizens
and their states, and issues of constitutional representation (human
citizens/corporate machines) as soon as this situation can be brought
under the command and control of .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS and
navigated in such a way as to serve the .US populace and its human
interests, and contribute to resolving world conflicts as a human
state in relation to other human states, and not as it now exists, as
dehumanized corporate machines seeking to dominate the planet via out-
of-control hegemonic policies. this is the choice, both internally
and externally, as to questions of present development (via machines
which govern humanity versus humans which govern machinery) and the
reconfiguring of world order in these terms will help bring about
transformation at world-scale which ultimately will enable the (new)
reality at this scale to be accurately modeled and accounted for in
decision-making which enables engaging the problems we share as
humans living on the planet (poverty, climate change, illiteracy,
disease, etc). this world ecosystem and the organic development of
its circuitry, in defense of our shared human interests, gives reason
to hope versus only despair the terms by which are present is now
being mediated, in 20th century ideologies that are limited by the
20th c. ideologues who can only serve this binary worldview and its
limited and distorted and 'backward' modeling of things: which is
unreality itself.
thus, to continue with .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS [outside.US] is
necessary to secure this new option in a sea of despair and to use
the shared vision and constellation of ideas by which to navigate
together towards these new shores on the horizon. to keep in mind the
purpose of government, to steer in the best direction, whether it is
for individuals or larger collective states, and to make a choice as
to whether this guide will be sentient, feeling, loving human beings
who strive for greater good, or the inhumanity of our machinery,
which has become like a beast, enslaving us as it grows into a
monster which seeks to destroy our very own existence. to those in
the daydream utopia of the .US, this may only seem like fiction, yet
to those who suffer the consequences of decision-making which has no
actual human interest in its core operations, it should be rather
clear when human morality has given way to machines, and their
immorality, which becomes fascism -- and those who support it are in
no uncertain terms themselves also FASCISTS. and, if the existing
situation is such that the STATUS-QUO in its day-to-day existence,
actually _breeds FASCISM -- then there is also a culpability of the
average citizen, who is enslaved to such a state of affairs that
oppresses humanity itself-- that the little decisions to go along
with things as they are has a terrible and exacting price: humans are
being killed to grow this machine, and sooner or later you will be
next. until things are changed, transformed, this malfunctioning
mechanism itself abolished and then reconstituted within a different
arrangement that balances the human and machine interests, and
governs according to higher ideals, not base materialism where humans
are equated with machines, and policies pursued in the name of
religion by politicians actually serve an evil agenda.
with this in mind, the following seeks to outline further steps to
take to secure this new arrangement. none of which is arbitrary in
its pursuit as to the goals described, all of which becomes necessary
and a first step towards taking back our destiny from machines...
---
the situation that exists both inside and outside the .US with regard
to the pursuit of "War of Terror" policies are based on a BIASED
decision-making process which exists outside of public checks and
balances -- and go's about declaring people 'TERRORISTS' in a way
that places any such actions in a context of illegality and
immorality, and worthy of lethal engagement by .US military force, as
if this warmaking is necessary to the collective defense and
protection of the .US constitution and democratic governance, no less.
every thesis needs to be able to be disproved, else it exists beyond
the realm of shared reasoning and exists only in terms of faith or
belief in ideas which may themselves run counter to reality. as such,
the 'War of Terror' stands in disregard of uncomfortable *facts*
which disprove its assertions about the nature of reality and the
ineffectiveness of its own modeling to engage issues it is espoused
to be doing. instead, this "War of Terror" instead exists in the
realm of THEORY, and not scientific theory in which peer review
places the ideas in some context of checks and balances, and
experiments are needed to justify the theory, and instead in the
theorization of language games in which one can declare a model of
reality to be the truth, as one sees it, and can meander along such a
path, reliant only upon their power to dictate such a path, no matter
if the half-life of its relation to facts outside itself and its own
hall of mirrors become an infinitely small slice of relativistic
thinking and perception which is equated with a universal vantage
point. and no matter what anyone says or does, this 'personal
subjective truth', contingent upon only those things as seen from a
given perspective, is somehow equated with representing an accurate
and balanced view of the infinitely more complex situation which is
based on collective reasoning, not privatized reasoning which becomes
a fixed-marketplace of ideas in which to exchange views which are
self-similar, in an empire of ideas, a private empiricism, said and
believed to represent the state of affairs as they exist, as these
are their representations, within such a methodology which is
detached from the basic requirements for public considerations.
in other words, this is to say the 'War of Terror' is all very
postmodern, in the sense of critically failure of ideological
proportions, which exists in terms of loopholes of big ideas, and
then taking any given particular exploit and suddenly calling it all
that exists, and the new standard by which things should be weighted,
judged, explained, etc. all the while, exempt from peer-review
because of the babbling din of 'intellectual' discourse has everyone
speaking without saying anything of substance with regard to the
actual underlying issues. it is the triumph of relativism and amoral
if not immoralism, to weigh and juggle options and decision-making as
if its exists on these very terms- and not something fundamentally
else, other, underneath which is much more sinister, known, and
undermined by the acceptance of this as the status quo approach to
issues of war or peace. academism has been militarized in that, by
appropriating its own hypocritical bureaucracy which accepts this
industrial ideologism -- it justifies policies which utilizes
language games which are ultimately 'head games' in pursuit of
policies, a complex camouflage by which to enact a FASCIST agenda via
this very status quo.
with regard to this issue of 'theory-based' warfare, devoid of
reliance on facts or evidence or even truth itself, and the policies
which autogenerate it, as if a set of programmers were set about to
making such a task for the machinery of state, by which to
function... it is this same dynamic which is seen in the .US
GOVERNMENT in which this very same aspect of communication via
DISCOURSE has become an issue and seemingly only an issue of language
games, by which to mediate and influence events, as they are
designed... this is to say that the .US Congress, those in the House
and Senate who 'legislate' ideas (making laws) are held in a unique
position with regard to this aspect of THEORY: because if it exists
in the realm of the sciences, this theorization would mean one thing
while if it exists in the realm of the humanities, it would mean
something else entirely. that is, it may be that a LAW could be the
outcome of a theory which has proven itself to accurately model the
nature of reality as it exists, via peer review and observation and
experiments, and through its accurate representation of a situation,
and its not being 'disproven' in its own claims, may be considered in
some way to exist as a known standard of how things operate and
exist. and thus can be incorporated in the basic modeling of events
and their dynamics, functioning, etc. this usually being based on
mathematical modeling and physical experiments which place the
reality of the ideas in relation to the material realm, in which the
validity and veracity of ideas is brought under intense and complete
scrutiny to achieve a high-quality and refined knowledge of what is
claimed to be true versus what actually exists, as truth, of what is
observed.
on the other side of this culture (ref. CP SNOW) there is the use of
'THEORY' that equates with non-mathematical approach to ideas which
enable that which can exist _in language_ to become its own type of
system of representation of the nature of things, ideas, in which
this process of peer review and verification happens within language
itself, as its own system of peer review -- which is detached from
material or physical nature in the sense that experiments are self-
contained within language itself, within ideas, and are not necessary
to map into the empirical realm by which others can validate or
disprove any assertions being made, for their claims of universality
of representing a situation as it is perceived to exist. what instead
may *only* function as HYPOTHESES in language, unproven speculations,
can take on the mantel of existing as if defining a universe of
THEORETICAL LAW - merely by thinking something is true, which thus
allows it to exist as truth, in one's own subjective relativist point
of view of any given events, which, if embedded in a hierarchy of
power or consensus-based marketplaces of ideas, can automatically
validate the worth or value of such information as if it has more
universal value, theoretically, than it may actually have, with
regard to modeling a given reality. in other words, THEORY in this
sense is detached from a modeling of reality which is based on checks-
and-balances of outsiders who may disprove the ideas or claims being
made, in terms of their universality, and this has become the status
quo in academics today. that is, if you say it is true, it is, if you
believe it and just keep writing. when things get trapped in
'discourse' this does not invalidate the point of view, this
validates it by extending it as a viewpoint which can sustain
existence through reasoning that is equally or relativistically as
valid as any other viewpoint, yet moreso if it is taken on as the
overriding point of view by which things are reasoned. in this way,
what is STATUS QUO may in itself validate the championing of a given
chosen relativism for a greater universality around which ideas are
supposed to gravitate, by mere consensus that cannot be disproven by
facts -- because it is assumed to carry some quality of legislating a
given reality, by declaring its perspective as paramount, by which to
empirically order and relate to events. in this sense it may be more
fictional than anything else, reliant upon a given context or
particular set of facts by which to perceive an issue or idea, yet
able to edit out anything that may seek to challenge this view, for
the priority of having such a point of view based on individualist
and demographic legitimacy. that is, some right to represent a point
of view, however it may be conceived to exist, by a given subject, on
any other given subject, as one sees fit.
the situation in day-to-day affairs may exist in-between these views,
where this personal subjectivism and impersonal objectivism are found
to overlap between the realms of mathematics and language, in that
the reality exists in a muddled middle ground in which logic and
psychological identity of the observer navigates this realm and how
ideas and observations and observers exist within it.
and in this way, the ideas of THEORY overlap between one view which
is based in physical law of sciences and another view which is based
on mental law of language and communication and representation. it is
in such a way that when the .US Congress or .US Mass Media mediates
ideas, it is to happen in such a complex realm where 'truth' exists
in a spectrum of interpretations which range from 'what can be
thought' to 'what can be proven'. and that the modeling of events,
based on the accurate representations of reality, as it exists and
not merely as it is believed or hoped to exist, relies upon the
integrity of the thinking and those doing this thinking...
for, if thinking is ultimately a game, by which one can compete over
which version of the truth 'wins' - regardless of the actual truth of
the nature of reality, and instead of a truth which exists simply
because it is the consensus -- it is 'created' or legislated to
exist, far beyond the realm of facts on the ground, where this truth
becomes law, because it is willed as such, -- that this relativist's
reality can thus claim a universal perspective by which to mediate
and empiricize (as Empire, if you will) events, by declarations of
truth as one see's it, and which is verified and built and
strengthened by all others who can, likewise, see it the same way, --
that in 'mass' media and a mass culture that at this SCALE of ideas,
that a view or representation of events which finds its justification
by a status quo approval of its modeling as if an accurate or best
representation of the reality, regardless of the actual facts and
instead, as a given option or choice by which to choose between
views-- that the choice of *these given facts* over another set of
relativistic facts can enable an arbitrary and ungrounded reality to
be represented and pursued, as if defining a collective situation
that exists only in fantasy and is largely based on fictitious
accounting that is never squared with outside viewpoints and can be
progressed until the very threshold where the unreality of this
modeling is faced by its antithesis, in reality. in other words: the
fiction that is the War of Terror finds its antithesis in events
which contradict its version of events, and invert what is being
claimed as being unreality itself. (9/11 and Iraq, or .PS democracy
as terrorism, torture as democracy, etc.).
the purpose for delving into this is because .US policy and .US
decision-making is based upon such a scenario by which, thinking
people pursue ideas in ways that can be totally detached from reality
itself, and beyond any checks and balances, in terms of the basic
philosophy of ideas and their interaction-- by the biases inherent in
the nature of thinking today, language, communication, etc.
and, thus, whether a citizen or a representative in government or the
leadership of the collective state itself, all exist within this
given context in which ideas are mediated, 'resolved' through some
decision-making in governance, by which to take actions on behalf of
the many interests, somehow charting a course that is supposed to get
from A -> B, in a way that accurately models events so as to actually
go from point A -> B and not from point A -> Z, where things exist
today. for instance, pursuit of the 'War of Terror' was supposed to
secure certain objectives and a worldview which verifies its approach
as effective in representing what is going on, and in securing this
reality via a mode of interaction which has proven itself disastrous.
such NEOCONSERVATIVE policy could only be further pursued, regardless
of facts, truth, or reality, if it were happening beyond any of
these, in the realm of postmodern THEORY in which physical and
material facts do not matter as to the hypothesis, as it has become
pure IDEOLOGY, and cannot be disproven to the true believers, who
have faith in their own constructions no matter evidence to the
contrary. thus, while WAR may be the most material of events, what
drives this warmaking may itself be detached from material checks-and-
balances altogether, in that material truth is unnecessary in holding
accountable the ideas in which tens of thousands have died on behalf
of bad, if not unfit ideas, not to speak of evil agendas, etc. this
is to say that the 'truth' of a given perspective such as the 'War of
Terror' can become separated out from the 'reality' of this very same
'War of Terror' -- and the two can proceed apace to such a degree
that the 'thesis' of the idea is ultimately only able to be disproven
by the reality of these ideas as they exist opposed to a given
modeling of events, -- this is to say that the 'reality' ultimately
becomes the antithesis to the THEORY, which is not based on facts or
truth or representing reality itself, and as such the THESIS ('War of
Terror') finds its antithesis in reality outside of its controlled
interpretation and private modeling of events, and it is at this
point that its hollowness and vacancy of truthfulness is seen for
what it is, by outside observations that readily prove it is not
capable of accurately modeling what it claims to model, and instead
may be an absolute failure as an idea, to model what it claims to, in
terms of ideas, in that it is based on subjective and relativistic
and even falsity and lies which distort the true situation as it
exists, in the experimental evidence -- and that to somehow be
obliged to the further pursuit of this set of ideas would be to
pursue them based on 'faith' and 'hope' and 'belief' in ideas proven
to be wrong, inaccurate, and unfit for representing the situation,
and to continue on such a path, _as ideas- in terms of truth,
thinking, reasoning-- which is not based on any of these.
in this way it could be said that this 'War of Terror' is an ideology
that is based on a HYPOTHESIS which does not model the actual
situation being encountered, yet it is pursued as if it is a THEORY
of what exists, yet not in terms of physical sciences and what this
entails and instead of in terms of the use of language and
communication by which to secure a view in a hierarchical system by
which to exploit this private subjective relativistic viewpoint into
a mass mediated environment that is supposed to represent world
reality of all citizens in a fight of good against evil, as if it is
actually in the best interests of the human public, existing in
objective terms, and somehow definitive of a universal battle by
which all souls will be weighed at the end of this long and
extenuating armageddon...
instead of engaging this situation as it exists, it is this very
BABBLE that has become the generator of the policies which themselves
are TERRORIZING human citizens worldwide in the name of the automated
and inhuman development of machineries of state, as they are scaled
from automaton individuals by the millions, who accept this as a
model of engagement, as it is the status quo and the default in the
mediating of events, via philosophy-- and therefore, at the level of
ideas and their role in this programming of TERROR, and the need for
the state of machinery whether individual or national or global to
exist in this paradigm of the 'War of Terror', it is up to this
thinking to also be conquered and transformed -- so as to align
itself with the option of Mideast Peace by which to provide the
legislators of ideas, ourselves and our own governance and self-
representations which scale up to the world of affairs as they exist,
to most accurately model and represent what is known to be true, by
way of reasoning and debate, with public checks and balances, by
which to navigate in such realms -- when instead today no one can
share common communication based on shared facts because the basic
philosophy of relativist ideologies of the 20th century holds onto
human minds, privatizing them and obliterating the shared
intelligence that could exist, for a lesser reality of what can be
accomplished by holding onto the formatted egos of institutions (i.e.
machines) which seek to represent the nature of reality as if it were
simply a matter of manufacturing what one believes to be true.
ultimately it is a question of the theology if not theocracy of
ideas, in a democratic, versus their secular philosophical appraisal
by which to accurately represent what exists as it exists, without
the supernatural agendas one may claim their ideas entail, yet which
exists beyond peer review or critique or even the ability to disprove
a THESIS, which itself exists to be disproven so as to evolve and
adapt and refine itself: and instead policies and people and ideas
exist in this muddled realm of non-scientific THEORY, which is only
HYPOTHESIS and not self-declaring law-making of the mind, which is
ignorant to the degree one believes themselves omnipotent to another
perspective of events, and winds down their own internal clock of
integrity until the total hypocrisy is laid bare for all to see...
say, like the 'War of Terror' having almost no merit whatsoever in
the ideas it espouses to expertly pursue as geostrategic policy,
having been a total failure which has sunk the .US state yet which
still seeks to govern regardless of any facts standing in the way.
to say that the current leadership in the .US is unfit to govern is
the understatement of the past few millennia, to say that furthering
of any decision-making by these 'representatives' be allowed to
continue, as if it is to uphold any reasonable oath of office, is
beyond reason, and too kind for what has occurred under their
direction. this is sheer incompetence and disregard for truth and
reality and people are dying every hour due to these decisions which
cannot and will not be transformed by those who created this
situation to begin with. they have zero legitimacy in terms of ideas,
and are incapable of continuing on in their positions of leadership
as this is to serve them, at their limits, while the state suffers
under their guidance. the current administration should not be
supported any further in policies and they should immediately step
down and resign their positions of leadership and allow a new
government to be formed, via constitutional convention as previously
stated.
so too, legislators who are in the .US Congress who support ideas and
create policies in this realm are likewise totally incompetent to
pursue the interests of public .US citizens, as human beings, in the
existing mechanism and should themselves disavow themselves of
continuing on in this charade of democratic governance-- by publicly
recognizing this .US system of governance is totally broken and that
a constitutional convention should be called, and the elections of
2006 postponed by each party in search of fixing what is now unable
to work until it is abolished and reconstituted under new rules of
engagement. someone has to speak reality to the existing
misrepresented truth, that the the nature of governance today is
incapable of effectively sustaining its own core functioning, in
terms of constitutional democracy and not in terms of a corporate
dictatorship that now exists, indefinitely, and will be extended by
whatever next politician steps in to take over representing this
state of perpetual TERROR. (1) this is not good enough, and this is
surely not democracy as it is based on the .US constitution, and the
rule of law and not the arbitrary interpretations of private men.
as said, this can thesis can be proven, and the existing modeling
disproven, in public debate, via reasoning which can be checked and
balanced by other views, and in such a democratic forum it would be
arguable as to what the actual legal constitutional actions would be
necessary to resolve this situation, if it is accurately representing
the situation as it exists. this has been argued to be that the .US
military takes COMMAND and CONTROL over the .US Government so as to
stop this wrong-headed and wrong-minded pursuit of policy which is
actually MADNESS which automatically is developing the TERRORISM that
it seeks to destroy, which is the business model of INSURRECTIONISTS
who are in the process of destroying the democratic state as it was
once constituted. and as such, this is a state of emergency which
until it engaged, threatens every citizen and the world itself, with
hidden consequences of waiting indefinitely to change the course of
events as they are unfolding, so as to pursue another and better
course for humanity. versus the private dictates and aberrations and
beliefs of a given man and his kind and his self-interests and
business objectives.
in such a way it is in this realm of ideas, which is based in a
context of 20th century philosophy and thinking, that those who are
doing the thinking and representing and decision-making are
themselves components which are creating (necessitating) this 'War of
Terror' by default of the status-quo functioning of the state, as it
works against the spirit of its original constitution and human
constituency. this is not debatable if in the realm of facts, yet can
be avoided by language games and the one-way short-circuiting of mass
media. as such this is to take a stand against the illusion of
continuing along this charted course, as if it is going to end up any
other place than where it has been going for 5+ years, and into the
future with each new ideological component added to its inner
workings. it must be stopped, annihilated in terms of its automated
functioning, and this situation brought under human command and
control, by which to rebalance what is not working and what is
working against human interests, so as to bring an end to this
ongoing madness.
including the generation and pursuit of bad ideas in the form of
policies and law-making that run counter to reality, as it exists,
and instead is a realm of fantastic fiction in which what is claimed
to be dealt with through expertise of representatives, is instead
only a charade and a caricature which serves no one except the
automated machinery of inhuman development and those who serve and
represent it, as part of this cybernetic organism, choosing to
represent the interests of this machinery over those of human
citizens. if domestically or in foreign policy. in this way, the
continuation of BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS must take into account this
inner working of .US policy making as being critical to the failures
now underway, in that it automatically creates more problems than it
is solving and must be brought under .US COMMAND and CONTROL so as to
have a chance at establishing MIDEAST PEACE via .US policy. it is not
possible given the existing configuration because the legislatures
exist outside of constitutional law in their own functioning, and are
beyond public checks and balances as they represent special
interests, in particular those of the Neoconservative machine.
therefore, .US BLACKFLAG OPERATIONS would short-circuit this and
place .US policy in the hands of public citizens once again, so as to
secure the policy maneuvers and public agenda necessary to transform
this endless global war into a sharing of global peace.
[cont. Part 3]
--- urls ---
// if not a dictatorship of corporate democracy now, when?
[1] Bush challenges hundreds of laws: President cites powers of his
office
By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | April 30, 2006
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/
bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/
"'President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more
than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the
power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts
with his interpretation of the Constitution.' ... "Bruce Fein, a
deputy attorney general in the Reagan administration, said the
American system of government relies upon the leaders of each branch
''to exercise some self-restraint." But Bush has declared himself the
sole judge of his own powers, he said, and then ruled for himself
every time"
[2] Rice, Rumsfeld block access to secret detainees: ICRC
http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?
type=topNews&storyID=12184135&src=rss/topNews
'Kellenberger said: "No matter how legitimate the grounds for
detention, there exists no right to conceal a person's whereabouts or
to deny that he or she is being detained."' .. 'The former senior
Swiss diplomat said that the ICRC (International Committee of the Red
Cross) would continue to seek access to such people as a matter of
priority.' .. 'The main objective of his annual visit this week was
for the ICRC to be granted access to "all persons held by the U.S. in
the context of the fight against terrorism, an issue he first raised
with the U.S. government over two years ago," the agency said.'
GUANTANAMO BAY PRISON // public service announcement
OPEN for international human rights & Red Cross inspections
CLOSE for violating human rights in the name of democracy
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net